RELATIVE CLAUSES

665.Relative subordinators (relative
pronouns, pronominal adjectives, adverbs) differ from subordinators
of the type of ὅτι and ἵνα in that the former have a grammatical
function of their own in the subordinate sentence; the latter
merely connect the subordinate clause with the main clause. In the
case of relative pronouns, the grammatical function in the
subordinate sentence is always that of a constituent element
(subject, object, etc.).

666.Relative pronouns link an included or
inserted sentence to the main or matrix sentence by replacing, in
the inserted sentence, the item the two sentences have in common
when taken as separate sentences. An illustration will make this
point clear.

The sentence

1n+

3

3n+

s

(1)

ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ παλαιά /

ἐστιν /

ὁ λόγος /

ὅν ἠκούσατε

1 Jn 2:7

The old commandment is the word which you
heard

contains a matrix sentence, The old
commandment is the word, and an included sentence, which
you heard, introduced by a relative pronoun. This complex
sentence may be thought of as deriving from two independent
sentences:

(1a)

ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ παλαιά ἐστιν ὁ λόγος

(1b)

τὸν λόγον ἠκούσατε

The two sentences have the item ὁ λόγος in
common (in (1b) in the accusative case). To include (1b) in (1a),
the common item, ὁ λόγος, is replaced in the second sentence by a
relative
pronoun: τὸν λόγον -> ὅν. The relative pronoun ὅν therefore has
ὁ λόγος in the matrix sentence as its antecedent. Cf. the
example given in §642.

667. The rules for transforming a sentence to be
inserted into a relative clause are simple:

667.1 The relative pronoun agrees with the
item in the inserted sentence which it replaces and the item in the
matrix sentence to which it refers (they are the same item) in
gender and number.

667.2 The relative pronoun takes its case
from its use in its own clause (the inserted sentence), i.e. it
takes the case the item it replaces had in the independent
sentence.

667.3 In (1) ὅν is masculine and singular because that
is the gender and number of λόγος; it is accusative because τὸν
λόγον is the object of the verb ἠχούσατε in (1b), just as ὅν is in
(1).

There are important exceptions to the second rule, which will be
noted subsequently (§670).

668.5 A relative clause may modify or expand any
nominal element in the matrix sentence, of which examples (2)-(5)
are merely illustrative.

669. In sentences (1)-(5) the antecedent immediately
precedes the relative pronoun. This need not be the case, e.g.

1d

D

2

4n+

i

(6)

οὐδεὶς /

[γὰp]

δύναται /

ταῦτα τὰ σημεῖα /

ποιεῖν //

s

ἃ σὺ ποιεῖς

Jn 3:2

For no one is able to do these signs which you
do

s is separated from its antecedent (4n+ in this
instance) by an infinitive (i).

670. It was stipulated in §667 that a relative pronoun
agrees with its antecedent in gender and number but takes its case
from its use in its own clause. This is in fact not always the
case. The relative is commonly attracted or
assimilated to the case of its antecedent, especially
where the relative ought to be accusative (by the rule) and the
antecedent is genitive or dative. Attraction is understandably more
common where other items do not intervene between antecedent and
relative.

671. In classical Greek ὅς was the definite relative
pronoun (who, which, that), ὅστις (ὅς +
τις, both parts of which are declined, §259) the indefinite
relative (whoever, whichever). This distinction
has been largely obscured in hellenistic Greek (Bl-D §293). For
most purposes the student may ignore the difference. ὅστις is used
in the New Testament only in the nom. sing. and plur. (ὅστις, ἥτις,
ὅ τι [written divided in order to distinguish it from the other
subordinator ὅτι, to which it is related]; οἵτινες, αἵτινες, ἅτινα
(ὅ τι also appears as an acc.) (§271; Bl-D §64(3)).

672. As an adjective clause, the relative clause is
often agnate to an articular participle. Observe the sequence in Lk
12:8f.:

(10)

πᾶς ὃς ἂν ὁμολογήσῃ ἐν ἐμοὶ ...

ὁ δὲ ἀρνησάμενός με ...

Lk 12:8f.

Everyone who acknowledges me ...
But he who denies me ...

The relative clause is here agnate to the
participial phrase. This relationship is confirmed by the form of
the second word group in the parallel passage in Matthew:

(11)

ὅστις δ' ἂν ἀρνήσηταί με ...

Mt 10:33

Whoever denies me ...

The kinship is also evident in the following
two word groups:

(12)

... Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν

Titus 2:14

... Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us

(13)

... Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, τοῦ δόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ
τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν

Gal 1:4

... Jesus Christ, the one giving himself
for
our sins

The articular participal in (13) may just as
well be translated by a relative clause in English:

... Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins

Further, cf. Mt. 7:24 with Lk 6:47.

673. Relative clauses may also function as substantive
clauses, i.e. as an element in the matrix sentence. When they do
so, their antecedent is "omitted" (from, the standpoint of
English).

The relative clause functions as the predicate
nominative (designated 3).

674. Relative clauses may function as adverbial
clauses although they retain the structure of adjective or
substantive clauses.

(17)

ἔπεμψα ὑμῖν Τιμόθεον ...

ὃς ὑμᾶς ἀναμνήσει τὰς ὁδούς μου

1 Cor 4:17

I sent Timothy to you ...
who will remind you of my ways

The relative clause in (17) is the equivalent
of a purpose clause (in order to remind you) with ἵνα or
an infinitive (s. §656, 574-575, 833). Structurally, the relative
clause is an adjective clause modifying Τιμόθεον.

Similarly, a relative clause may be the equivalent of a
conditional clause (if-clause):

(18)

ὅς ἂν γὰρ ἔχῃ, δοθήσεται αὐτῷ

Lk 8:18

For it shall be given to him who has

ὃς ἂν ἔχῃ is the equivalent of ἐὰν τις ἔχη,
if anyone has.

For the variety of relative clauses in the New
Testament, s. Bl-D §§377-380.

6740. With the relative pronoun the particle ἄv has a
generalizing force, ὃς ἄv = whoever. With ὅστις, ἄv merely
heightens the indefiniteness. In hellenistic Greek this ἄv is often
written ἐάν (εἰ, -If, plus αν), as though ἐάν did not
contain εἰ, if.

ἄv is also taken to modify the meaning of the moods. Rather than
as a means of marking indefiniteness, it is understood to limit the
verb to particular conditions or circumstances: in that case, under
the circumstances. Smyth §1762.